With religious freedom, could a professional singer be forced to sing lyrics she believed to be immoral?

In general, does religious freedom protect us from coerced advocacy of actions that violate our moral conscience?

Update: For those who say no one can force a singer to sing, suppose a court fined the singer a large amount of money for refusing to sing, or put her in jail. Compatible with religious freedom?

Update 2: Let's stipulate that the singer is not under contract, and it is the refusal to sing (or to sign a contract to sing) that is at issue. This would parallel the cases of a photographer refusing to sign on to take pictures, or a baker refusing to bake a special cake, for a parody wedding. The photographer paid... show more Let's stipulate that the singer is not under contract, and it is the refusal to sing (or to sign a contract to sing) that is at issue. This would parallel the cases of a photographer refusing to sign on to take pictures, or a baker refusing to bake a special cake, for a parody wedding. The photographer paid $7000 in court costs, and the baker was driven out of business.

Follow

19 answers 19

Report Abuse

Are you sure that you want to delete this answer?

Sorry, something has gone wrong.

Answers

Best Answer: I recently received an email alert from United Families International. According to a case in New Mexico "Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin now face over $7,000 fine and court costs because they held to their religious beliefs in turning down a job to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony." Since their business is said to be a "public accomodation" they cannot refuse to give service based on sexual orientation. The courts are holding that a gay person's right to not be inconvienced by someone's religious views is a higher right than your freedom of religion right guaranteed by the Constitution.

• A Vermont Country inn ordered to pay $30,000 penalty for declining to host a gay wedding reception. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/vt-inn-2-…

• Based on a non-discrimination law, Evergreen College in Washington is allowing a man to use the women’s sauna and shower facilities. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-…

I like what UFI wrote about it in conclusion:

"Non-discrimination laws based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity/Expression create an environment that imposes a new value system upon citizens. It is using the force of government to do social engineering with the goal to normalize and legitimize same-sex behavior. These laws compromise your ability to sustain your own family’s values, allow for significant government over-reach and coercion while negatively impacting businesses and public places.

"No one should be forced to “choose between their religious convictions and their livelihood.” There are other ways to accomplish the goal of treating people fairly and with kindness than harsh and punitive government intervention. “Tolerance” has to be a two-way street.

"There is no constitutional right to have someone bake you a wedding cake, but there is a constitutional right to freedom of religion/expression – it’s called the First Amendment."

Not always. It depends on how you define coercion. Let's say a singer is locked into a contract that says she either sings and acts as someone tells her or else she has no income. She cannot use her name or likeness, etc. She could not get out of such a contract by claiming religious freedom, because she has the option to accept the consequences of choosing not to sing those lyrics etc.
But when a person is in millions of dollars of debt due to spending based on the expectation of future income, then some of the consequences for refusing might include jail time for fraud. Not that she knew in advance that she would be asked to perform immorally, and was actually planning to lose an income, but she could be charged anyway, because people who stand to lose millions of dollars are not the forgiving sort.
So there are definitely situations where a singer might find herself coerced with no way out, and claiming a moral objection will not protect her from jail for fraud.

On the other hand, if people will be more careful about the contracts they sign and never go into debt, then they can avoid that particular scenario of legal coercion.
Generally, a person has the right to refuse and accept the consequences. Even going to jail to face an accusation as a consequence is still an option. Even accepting death is an option. It all depends on the definition of coercion.
Is asking someone three times coercion? It could be.

That is not only infringing upon freedom of religion but also freedom of speech. Congress cannot force our beliefs, nor our speech. If that happens, we should impeach the entire congress.
At this point what would happen is that the singer would probably get sued for breaking the contract to perform. The artist does not always have control over the content to be performed. Much of that is done by the managers. Thus, if the performer found out that an objectionable number was to be performed and therefore refused to perform it, they could not force the performance but could sue for breach of contract. Does that coerce performance? Perhaps.

its best to answer your question using the bible..Since the Bible is the only thing that can speak for itself.

(Psalms 34:14) Turn away from what is bad.Do what is good.Seek to find peace an pursue it.

Your religious freedom allows you to choose and act on your own religion.
The coerced advocacy has been around since Day 1 from as early as adam and eve.
According to that scripture, its up to you to make that call, Whether you will sing or not.

Think about this.. Was adam and eve forced to eat the fruit?

(jer 14:9) shows us that, Even if we wouldnt personally engage in all the activities that we sing about, When we feed our hearts with things god hates, after time it can dull down our senses....And if we are not careful we could slowly begin to engage in the very things we are singing about.

So to answer your question , No, having persuaded advocacy has no protection.
Freedom of speech allows anyone to try and persuade you. Its up to you to serve god out of a clean conscience (1 tim 1:5)

That should be up the singer to decide. I don't see any big deal, singing is like acting; can a religious person be allowed to play a murderer in a play, for example?

I'm a part time musician, sometimes I'm paid to play music I don't really like very much. Sometimes I enjoy songs that are completely contradictory to my religious convictions. However, now I'm caring a lot less about making money at music now and caring more about enjoying what I play (I'm on a pension now and I don't really need the money as bad as I used to). For example, I nearly wrecked my car sliding in the snow coming home from a free gig; but I was happy because it was the largest audience I ever had for people actually interested in listening to me play traditional Jewish and Arab tunes on the oud (Middle Eastern Instrument); I even got to sneak in a few original tunes because I don't think the audience knew the difference. Much more fun than playing bass or rhythm guitar on Adele songs in my opinion; I couldn't care less about Adele or her music.

That's just silly, why fine or put someone in jail for refusing to do a song? Just fire them, refuse to pay or get someone else to do it. I had a guy I used to work with who refused to play the correct guitar parts so I don't work with him anymore.

I don't see how. Singers usually have the right to choose not to sing. There could be pressure but not force. This works the other way usually tho. I am an atheist and used to be a singer but my voice is very much suited to choral music - this is nearly all religious - I have sung Ave Maria, Swing Low, The Prayer of St Francis of Assisi, Jerusalem. Nothing at all really for the non-believer in this style. I put up with it because I loved to sing.

Singers aren't slaves. They either accept a particular role in a play, opera, etc., or they don't.
The complication lies in when the singer while practicing their art - send out a message that the person finds personally repugnant.

Here the singer is faced with a dilemma - do I continue to sing in violation of my conscience - or do I quit this role?

Unless the Singer is well established, or has alternate sources of income - their very livelyhood depends on their art. Making it a difference between obeying your conscience or starving - a difficult decision for anyone.

If - for example - the professional singer was hired to sing songs to order and accepted such employment with a contract that included a penalty clause, then the singer could be legally required to either sing all requested songs or abide by the penalty clause - whether or not the singer found one or more such songs religiously unacceptable.

Religious freedom means that you are free to exercise your religion - but not in any situation you put yourself. It means you are free to exercise your religion when you are in control of your time and your environment.

It does not mean - for example - that you are free to exercise your religion while you are being paid by your employer to perform work. If you find such employment incompatible with your religious beliefs, then freedom of religion (and other freedoms) allows you to terminate your employment so that you can exercise your freedom of religion on your *own* time, and so that you can seek employment that *is* compatible with your religious beliefs.

Conclusion: freedom of religion is the freedom to practice your religion when you are in control of your time and environment. It does not allow you the freedom to practice your religion in any situation you find yourself.

No one can be forced to speak, sing or act in a play. You are in charge of your own words and actions at all times. It's nothing to do with religious freedom, it's to do with YOU either keeping your mouth shut or not.

They are not forced to do it. They do it because bunches of people pay money for them to do it. As for religious freedom, it depends on the religion. You can be arrested for singing good things about God or bad things about Allah.